Case Explained: USA V. MCCLELLON

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-18 Docket: 2:22-cr-00073-LK-1 The Ninth Circuit affirmed Donte McClellon’s 42-month prison sentence and three years of supervised release following his conviction for wire fraud and bank fraud involving false Paycheck Protection Program loan applications. The court held that the district court did not err in calculating “loss” by including “intended loss” amounts for loans that were denied or clawed back, even if the defendant’s objection was reviewed under a plain error standard rather than de novo review. The court applied United States Sentencing Guidelines § 1B1.3 (relevant conduct), which mandates that an offense level be determined based on all acts and omissions committed by the defendant, including “all harm that resulted from” those acts and “all harm that was the object of such acts.” Relying on the definition of “object” as the “end aimed at” or “goal,” the court reasoned that § 1B1.3 requires consideration of intended harm, not just actual loss. Consequently, the district court properly included the amounts McClellon sought to obtain through his fraudulent scheme in the loss calculation. The practical consequence is that McClellon’s sentence remains in effect, and he must serve the imposed term of imprisonment and supervised release. The court also directed the clerk to strike two additional notices of appeal filed by McClellon from subsequent district court orders, ruling they were not proper amendments to the existing notice of appeal and should be processed separately. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.